Psychology of an Internet Troll #studying #psychology #online

#

Embed this infographic on your site!

The editors at Best Online Psychology Schools decided to research the topic of:

Psychology of an Internet Troll

Psychological Impairments of the Average Troll:

– Deindividuation: when we reduce our sense of our own identity we are less likely to stick to social norms. – “suicide baiting” study showed that when someone threatening to jump from a high building they were encouraged to do so by bystanders – people were more likely to do this if they were part of a large crowd, if the jumper was above the 7th floor, and if it was dark. – (factors that allowed the observers to lose their own individuality) – Social psychologist Nicholas Epley: Psychologically, we are “distant” from the person we’re talking to and less focused on our own identity in an e-mail. As a result we’re more prone to aggressive behaviour. – #cut4bieber brought to you by Troll DutchMinati is an example of this – (the social experimenting troll)

Dissociative anonymity: You don’t know me

– simple anonymity: provides a sense of protection, – this allows the user to move about without any kind of indication of identity or even distinguishing characteristics other than potentially a username. – allows for misrepresentation of a person’s true self; – eg online a male can pose as a female and vice versa – However, even if one’s identity is known and anonymity is removed from the equation, the inability to physically see the person on the other end causes one’s inhibitions to be lowered. – eg the Real Housewives of New Jersey Facebook page’s hateful comments about Milania Guidice, the five-year-old daughter of a Real Housewives cast member.- comments from people whose names were attached to their Facebook accounts. – Linda L Goolsby, a grandmother of seven wrote: “there is nothing cute about her, she is ugly inside and out. she has the worst mother and father there ever is.”

Asynchronicity: See you later

– conversations do not happen in real time. – it’s easier for someone to “throw their opinions out” and then leave – a person can make a single post that might be considered very personal, emotionally charged, or inflammatory and then “run away” – In this way, the person achieves catharsis by “voicing” their feelings, even if the audience is just as invisible. – Dr. David Solly at University of the Rockies, a graduate school specializing in social and behavioral sciences, says complaining — be it on the Web or alone in front of a mirror — releases of chemicals in the brain and body helping us to counteract stress and feel physically better. – It also tends to make us feel better emotionally because we feel we’re more in control of our circumstances. – No excuses! the asynchronous nature of the Internet also allows a person to choose their words carefully (the bitching troll)

Solipsistic Introjection: It’s all in my head (and the creation of a stalking troll)

– Lacking any kind of visual face-to-face cues, the human mind will assign characteristics and traits to a “person” in interactions on the internet. – solipsistic introjection can help individuals bond or identify with others in a given community. – The mind will associate traits to a user according to our own desires, needs, and wishes – traits that the real person might not actually have. – allows fantasies to be played out in the mind (the stalker troll)

Dissociative Imagination: It’s just a game/ I don’t know you

– a feeling of escapism is produced – a way to throw off mundane concerns to address a specific need without having to worry about consequences. – lawyer Emily Finch (a criminal lawyer studying identity theft in cyberspace): people may see cyberspace as a kind of game where the normal rules of everyday interaction don’t apply to them. – Similarly, a famous 1960s-era study found that people were willing to administer an electric shock (it was fake, but they didn’t know it) to a person they couldn’t see, even if they knew it was causing them serious pain – Later replications of Milgram’s studies found that his conclusion was less likely to be true if people identified more strongly with the student receiving the shocks. – when humans are faced with guesswork and ambiguity, they often perceive it as threatening (thus the creation of the angry, hurtful troll) – example: Michael Butsch (aka Violent Acrez) of Reddit Infamy

Minimizing Authority: You’re Not So Great Yourself

– Oppositional Defiance Disorder – affects 16% of the general public in the U.K. or 20% schoolage children in the U.S. – lack of hierarchy causes changes in interactions with others. – If people can’t see the user, others have no way to know if the user is an on-duty police officer, head of state, or some kind of “ordinary” person hanging out in their den on their computer. – people can be reluctant to speak their minds in front of an authority figure, but that fear is removed online – must have the last word (the professorial, know-it-all troll)

Narcissism: I speak for you

– People with extreme views who are extremely loud about them manage to delude themselves into thinking everybody agrees. – Study w/ Stanford University students showed that students who thought they spoke for the majority expressed their opinions more readily. – Of course, trolls not in this category won’t care if they’re majority opinion or not (the self-righteous troll) – exampe: Jai Maharaj on discussion boards of usenet

Lost in translation: Miscommunication common

– text-based messages are inherently more ambiguous – one man’s joke is another man’s insult (the obnoxious class clown troll) – example: David Thorn, who tried to pay a bill with pictures of Spider

How to Psych Out Your Troll

– In order to establish a rigorous study of trolls, University of Central Lancashire lecturer Claire Hardaker studied nine years worth of unmoderated comments (including 172 million words) from a forum about horses. In summarizing the behavioral patterns Hardaker wrote:Trolling can – be frustrated if users correctly interpret an intent to troll, but are not provoked into responding – be thwarted if users correctly interpret an intent to troll, but counter in such a way as to curtail or neutralise the success of the troller, – fail if users do not correctly interpret an intent to troll and are not provoked by the troller – succeed if users are deceived into believing the troller’s pseudo-intention(s), and are provoked into responding sincerely. – Finally, users can mock troll. That is, they may undertake what appears to be trolling with the aim of enhancing or increasing effect, or group cohesion. – Sources: – http://trollpolice.com/what-can-you-do/ – http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/3/19/ – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_disinhibition_effect – http://www.cracked.com/funny-5111-internet-troll/ – http://www.newscientist.com/blog/technology/2007/11/dont-flame-me-bro.html – http://io9.com/5387029/stanford-study-explains-internet-trolls – http://www.pcworld.com/article/242526/internet_trolls_the_psychology_behind_the_rants.html – http://rockies.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=15659 ?>